Let's assume for a moment they're not just passing things because they're bat-crap-crazy. What would be the compelling reason leading to someone making a bill that would allow guns in bars, parks, and school parking lots?

I'd imagine the argument is that laws banning them would mean the only people with them would be the kind of people who don't obey laws anyway. I've not read the articles yet but the school parking lot may be intended to cover teachers and administrators who keep firearms in their cars. Parks in some places include parks with significant wildlife where you might want to carry as well. Bars just seem imprudent, but again, it just means you disarm law abiding citizens. Frankly you could do more to curtail deaths by outlawing the serving of alcohol at bars ...

As far as disarming lawful citizens, iirc the vast majority of mass shooting in recent years has been in a "gun free zone"; one exception that comes to mind happened in a parking lot in AZ. I'd have to do some digging for numbers.

Edited to remove stats I am unsure about.

Last edited by fuzzygeek on Sat Jul 27, 2013 11:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I'm not sure about NC, or the new CCW laws (my permit isn't due for renewal until 2014), but in my state, the only places you can't carry concealed are behind metal detectors. So that doesn't really limit you from carrying anywhere other than airports and government buildings. Places that serve alcohol are fine. That might've changed when they passed the legislation forcing all states to recognize issued permits regardless of where they were issued - I'll find out next year, I guess.

- I'm not Jesus, but I can turn water into Kool-Aid.- A Sergeant in motion outranks an officer who doesn't know what the hell is going on.- A demolitions specialist at a flat run outranks everybody.

An article from 1998 that seems awfully apropos on the GOP"The Republican Party is increasingly a party of the South and the mountains. The southernness of its congressional leaders -- Speaker Newt Gingrich, of Georgia; House Majority Leader Dick Armey and House Majority Whip Tom DeLay, of Texas; Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, of Mississippi; Senate Majority Whip Don Nickles, of Oklahoma -- only heightens the identification. There is a big problem with having a southern, as opposed to a midwestern or a California, base. Southern interests diverge from those of the rest of the country, and the southern presence in the Republican Party has passed a "tipping point," at which it began to alienate voters from other regions.

As southern control over the Republican agenda grows, the party alienates even conservative voters in other regions. The prevalence of right-to-work laws in southern states may be depriving Republicans of the socially conservative midwestern trade unionists whom they managed to split in the Reagan years, and sending Reagan Democrats back to their ancestral party in the process. Anti-government sentiment makes little sense in New England, where government, as even those who hate it will concede, is neither remote nor unresponsive.

The most profound clash between the South and everyone else, of course, is a cultural one. It arises from the southern tradition of putting values -- particularly Christian values -- at the center of politics. This is not the same as saying that the Republican Party is "too far right"; Americans consistently tell pollsters that they are conservative on values issues. It is, rather, that the Republicans have narrowly defined "values" as the folkways of one regional subculture, and have urged their imposition on the rest of the country. Again, the nonsoutherners who object to this style of politics may be just as conservative as those who practice it. But they are put off to see that "traditional" values are now defined by the majority party as the values of the U-Haul-renting denizens of two-year-old churches and three-year-old shopping malls.http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/is ... un/gop.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YojKugFDzNk#at=23"At that point we have to stand up and win the argument and say to the American people, 'No, we voted to fund the government, but why is Barack Obama threatening to shut down the government?'"

"...I think shut down is a misnomer. What it is in fact is a partial, temporary shut down because Social Security checks continue to flow, the military continues to be paid, the national debt continues to be serviced."

"If there's no Continuing Resolution in effect, then what happens is non-essential government functions are temporarily suspended. Now that's inconvenient, but we actually see that every single week on the weekends," added Sen. Cruz.

So... force a shutdown of the government and blame the other guy? Okay...

I feel bad for AZ, and I hope they can reach a compromise with FEMA to help out AZ with the fires...but I can't stand Flake and McCain bitching about FEMA/AZ not getting federal aid, when they voted against Hurricane Sandy relief.http://www.opencongress.org/vote/2013/s/4

To some of our non us members, this probably isn't that shocking, but to me, this is downright appalling. I don't believe that anyone should be able to tell people that they can't name their child something, unless it's something terrible (Like say...., Fuckwit Dumbass)

But, telling someone that they can't name their child Messiah, and then follow it up with a religious connotation about how it's a title that only one person has earned, and that person is Jesus Christ, shows a serious problem with the separation of religion and government in the country.

To some of our non us members, this probably isn't that shocking, but to me, this is downright appalling. I don't believe that anyone should be able to tell people that they can't name their child something, unless it's something terrible (Like say...., Fuckwit Dumbass)

But, telling someone that they can't name their child Messiah, and then follow it up with a religious connotation about how it's a title that only one person has earned, and that person is Jesus Christ, shows a serious problem with the separation of religion and government in the country.

Seriously Judge? You are a Fuckwit Dumbass.

They protest to the kid being named Messiah, but live in a county named Cocke.

Messiah is not an allowed name in New Zealand, nor are Lucifer, Duke, 89, Bishop, Baron, General, Judge, King, Knight, Mr. and the letters C, D, I and T. You also can't have a name with an asterisk, comma, period, or other punctuation mark (one assume apostrophe is allowed).

Apparently the list of disallowed names was started after we took some international grief for allowing a set of twins to be called Benson and Hedges, and boys to be named Violence and Number 16 Bus Shelter.